

No need to be coy. If you have the answer (that you haven’t already shared) then don’t let me stop you. Explain.
No need to be coy. If you have the answer (that you haven’t already shared) then don’t let me stop you. Explain.
“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” – Benjamin Franklin
You’re still thinking in very small human scales.
I read enough speculative sci-fi to know the idea you’re talking about.
An immortal Artificial Super Intelligence could spend centuries, hundreds of generations or more, subtly tweaking al thel various cultures toward a more harmonious coexistence.
You’re saying that like its a good thing. For all of humanities faults, I’ll take them over humanity being controlled by something else. R. Daneel Olivaw tried and it wasn’t a great ride for humanity.
is white light “white” because that’s what our start emits?
I’m going to say “no”. Just because humans only see in the “visible spectrum” doesn’t mean that all life on Earth does. There are creatures that can see in infrared spectrum such as:
There are also creatures that can see way past the other side of the “visible spectrum” into ultraviolet
So as you can see from these lists its not just a specific genus or species. Many of our mammalian cousins can do this. Given that many other species have evolved this ability, it just wasn’t evolutionarily needed for humanity to survive.
Those certain aspects which cause intolerance, would need to be changed. Nothing more.
Nothing more? You’re handwaving away massive changes needed to many groups including erasing or altering their culture or identity. I’ll keep playing your game though.
Okay, so here’s a statement from a Muslim scholar on the doctrine in the Qurʾān:
God is one and unique; he has no partner and no equal. Trinitarianism, the Christian belief that God is three persons in one substance, is vigorously repudiated.
So one side believes in one god, while the other believes in three persons in one substance.
Both have extreme groups within each religion that believe only their way is correct, and will use violence when needed to prove it. Which one gets changed, and who decides who gets their belief system altered so they aren’t intolerant?
“a more globally compatible culture.”
My apologies. You used a singular there in your language. I took that to mean one.
There are many different yet compatible cultures, that are able to exist together in the world. It’s really only certain aspects of a few cultures which drive them to be intolerant of other cultures, that would need to be changed.
So a set of compatible cultures then. What about the ones that aren’t compatible? What happens with those?
Conflicting things could be true at the same time in different places. Having one ruler doesn’t require one set of rules. There could be, and would need to be different rules for different communities.
So its like what we already have today then, yes? What would prevent those different places from going to war with each other over their differences?
An AI might be willing to do that, and slowly nudge over generations, differing communities toward a more globally compatible culture.
You’re providing another great example except I don’t think you intend to. Your hypothetical example for the perfect ruler is one that works to unify the world into a single culture. Thats one definition of genocide. I don’t actually think you mean for that, but your definition can certainly match the word.
Already you and I don’t agree on that path, because the ideas we have are mutually exclusive. We can’t have one part of the world that is working toward a single unifying culture while the other have embraces and celebrates the diversity of our many cultures. If one vision of the world is going to exist, one of those groups has to bend to the will of the other.
Hey there, I was wondering if this is normal or if anyone can relate to this. I 20/male…
What you’re going through is pretty normal at your age (in western cultures) and manifests in a few different ways. Seeing yourself identify with another culture is one common way.
Ultimately what you’re going through is a search of, and identification of, who you are: Your identity.
You’re right at the beginning of a very interesting part of your life. You’ll try on ideas and beliefs like clothing, wearing them for awhile and just as quickly discarding them when they don’t feel right. Its a set of refining actions. You’ll swing to another extreme and then drop that one too. However, each time this happens the swings are less dramatic, and the direction you take are closer to who you decide you are. Most people spend a good chunk of their 20s doing this, and at the same time learning about the adult world, its many joys, and many frustrations.
So feel free to explore your thoughts. Decide what is right for you. Experience all kinds of things to give yourself enough material and life experience to make good judgments but don’t be afraid to make mistakes! Now is the time in your life where you’ll have the most power, but the most forgiveness. Learn, live, love, travel and experience other cultures, get your heart broken, perform a service for others, be greedy just once, and finally find your true self, your true form, but then I’ll likely be saying to you “Happy 31st birthday!”. Buckle up its a weird, wonderful, and wild ride you have in front of you for the next 10 or so years!
The current issue in picking a human global ruler, is that it would require super human traits
I disagree. The current issue is picking mutually exclusive contradictory traits.
One person will one religious freedom. Another will want a theocracy. Both of those cannot be true at the same time.
Considering we have no consensus on what a suitable human president would be, I’m not sure how we can give parameters for a machine version.
You’re projecting your own ideas on that, friend. I never suggesting sitting anything out. That was you.
In the context of that post they referred to “dream scenario” implying that that action will likely never happen for Musk or trump. I was pointing out that it is very likely to happen for trump. Nothing with my statement is advocating action or inaction beyond pointing out that fact.
trump is 78 years old and is obese. Neither of those two facts usually makes for longevity. Actuarial tables say he could die of natural causes this afternoon and it would be a completely normal thing.
Musk may be more valuable as a scapegoat to trump with all the pending fallout of DOGE costs and the coming recession.
Sue for defamation that Youtube are alleging he is promoting criminal activity of piracy.
Here I was thinking you were in the pockets of “big chopstick” and now I find you’re secretly a plant for “big spoon”! Well played, sir!
Were they in their twenties? I’ve run across lots of folks in their 20s that were like that. I admit I did some of that myself in my late teens and early twenties. Its certainly possible to grow out of that, and cutting them out of your lift is the right thing to do. I know I didn’t have the words or reasons why I was doing that at the time, but with years of life experience I can now verbalize it. Feel free to give them some parting words as to why you’re doing it too. If they gain a bit of maturity and self awareness they can make a change and be someone worth being around.
However, its not your job to fix them or even put up with them. You can leave them with their own problems.
So you can’t eat anything with chopsticks! /s
It’s a multi-generational problem, so we should start fixing it now.
First, sure we can try, but we don’t live in a monolithic place. We have to convince others and come up with plans on how to do it. That’s going to take time. We can start, but ending is a long long way from now.
What is it about EVs is going to make that easier?
I’ve already said it many times, EVs don’t put out CO2 while we’re working on transitioning.
Further, we still have no answer for last mile non-EV green delivery . I notice you ignored that last point.
Your prior question. If you don’t have the answer, how can you claim that there is one?
You’re assertion is that humanity, left to its own devices, would cause chaos and death (I don’t disagree). Yet, you also say that a sufficient AI could make changes to humanity to make it less so. If the humans didn’t make those changes themselves, then they have lost their autonomy. Yet you say that isn’t so.
If the answer is as true as you say, why the are you being so coy with the answer?